Operationalizing the resource based view for nascent and young firms : developing scales for resource advantages and disadvantages

Principal Topic: It is well known that most new ventures suffer from a significant lack of resources, which increases the risk of failure (Shepherd, Douglas and Shanley, 2000) and makes it difficult to attract stakeholders and financing for the venture (Bhide & Stevenson, 1999). The Resource-Based View (RBV) (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984) is a dominant theoretical base increasingly drawn on within Strategic Management. While theoretical contributions applying RBV in the domain of entrepreneurship can arguably be traced back to Penrose (1959), there has been renewed attention recently (e.g. Alvarez & Busenitz, 2001; Alvarez & Barney, 2004). This said, empirical work is in its infancy. In part, this may be due to a lack of well developed measuring instruments for testing ideas derived from RBV. The purpose of this study is to develop a measurement scales that can serve to assist such empirical investigations. In so doing we will try to overcome three deficiencies in current empirical measures used for the application of RBV to the entrepreneurship arena. First, measures for resource characteristics and configurations associated with typical competitive advantages found in entrepreneurial firms need to be developed. These include such things as alertness and industry knowledge (Kirzner, 1973), flexibility (Ebben & Johnson, 2005), strong networks (Lee et al., 2001) and within knowledge intensive contexts, unique technical expertise (Wiklund and Shepard, 2003). Second, the RBV has the important limitations of being relatively static and modelled on large, established firms. In that context, traditional RBV focuses on competitive advantages. However, newly established firms often face disadvantages, especially those associated with the liabilities of newness (Aldrich & Auster, 1986). It is therefore important in entrepreneurial contexts to expand to an investigation of responses to competitive disadvantage through an RBV lens. Conversely, recent research has suggested that resource constraints actually have a positive effect on firm growth and performance under some circumstances (e.g., George, 2005; Katila & Shane, 2005; Mishina et al., 2004; Mosakowski, 2002; cf. also Baker & Nelson, 2005). Third, current empirical applications of RBV measured levels or amounts of particular resources available to a firm. They infer that these resources deliver firms competitive advantage by establishing a relationship between these resource levels and performance (e.g. via regression on profitability). However, there is the opportunity to directly measure the characteristics of resource configurations that deliver competitive advantage, such as Barney´s well known VRIO (Valuable, Rare, Inimitable and Organized) framework (Barney, 1997). Key Propositions and Methods: The aim of our study is to develop and test scales for measuring resource advantages (and disadvantages) and inimitability for entrepreneurial firms. The study proceeds in three stages. The first stage developed our initial scales based on earlier literature. Where possible, we adapt scales based on previous work. The first block of the scales related to the level of resource advantages and disadvantages. Respondents were asked the degree to which each resource category represented an advantage or disadvantage relative to other businesses in their industry on a 5 point response scale: Major Disadvantage, Slight Disadvantage, No Advantage or Disadvantage, Slight Advantage and Major Advantage. Items were developed as follows. Network capabilities (3 items) were adapted from (Madsen, Alsos, Borch, Ljunggren & Brastad, 2006). Knowledge resources marketing expertise / customer service (3 items) and technical expertise (3 items) were adapted from Wiklund and Shepard (2003). flexibility (2 items), costs (4 items) were adapted from JIBS B97. New scales were developed for industry knowledge / alertness (3 items) and product / service advantages. The second block asked the respondent to nominate the most important resource advantage (and disadvantage) of the firm. For the advantage, they were then asked four questions to determine how easy it would be for other firms to imitate and/or substitute this resource on a 5 point likert scale. For the disadvantage, they were asked corresponding questions related to overcoming this disadvantage. The second stage involved two pre-tests of the instrument to refine the scales. The first was an on-line convenience sample of 38 respondents. The second pre-test was a telephone interview with a random sample of 31 Nascent firms and 47 Young firms (< 3 years in operation) generated using a PSED method of randomly calling households (Gartner et al. 2004). Several items were dropped or reworded based on the pre-tests. The third stage (currently in progress) is part of Wave 1 of CAUSEE (Nascent Firms) and FEDP (Young Firms), a PSED type study being conducted in Australia. The scales will be tested and analysed with a random sample of approximately 700 Nascent and Young firms respectively. In addition, a judgement sample of approximately 100 high potential businesses in each category will be included. Findings and Implications: The paper will report the results of the main study (stage 3 – currently data collection is in progress) will allow comparison of the level of resource advantage / disadvantage across various sub-groups of the population. Of particular interest will be a comparison of the high potential firms with the random sample. Based on the smaller pre-tests (N=38 and N=78) the factor structure of the items confirmed the distinctiveness of the constructs. The reliabilities are within an acceptable range: Cronbach alpha ranged from 0.701 to 0.927. The study will provide an opportunity for researchers to better operationalize RBV theory in studies within the domain of entrepreneurship. This is a fundamental requirement for the ability to test hypotheses derived from RBV in systematic, large scale research studies.

Making sense of the resource-based view?

The Resource Based View (RBV) of strategic management has been criticized for relying on inconsistent assumptions of rationality, and mutually inconsistent underlying hypotheses. In this paper, I outline how these critiques can be addressed by re-building RBV on a sense-making foundation. The core notions from sense-making of bounded cognition, retrospective sense-making, incrementalism, loose coupling, causal maps and organizational paradigm are introduced. These are then used to propose a re-construction of key RBV constructs, extending some conceptual discussions, and providing for a conceptually consistent formulation. Implications for the use of RBV as a theory and future research are discussed.

Integrating agency and resource dependence theory : firm profitability, industry regulation, and board task performance

Boards of directors are key governancemechanisms in organizations and fulfill twomain tasks:monitoringmanagers and firm performance, and providing advice and access to resources. In spite of a wealth of researchmuch remains unknown about how boards attend to the two tasks. This study investigates whether organizational (firm profitability) and environmental factors (industry regulation) affect board task performance. The data combine CEOs' responses to a questionnaire, and archival data from a sample of large Italian firms. Findings show that past firm performance is negatively associatedwith board monitoring and advice tasks; greater industry regulation enhances perceived board task performance; board monitoring and advice tasks tend to reinforce each other, despite their theoretical and practical distinction.

Portfolio Entrepreneurship in Family Firms: A Resource-based Perspective

The phenomenon of portfolio entrepreneurship has attracted considerable scholarly attention and is particularly relevant in the family fi rm context. However, there is a lack of knowledge of the process through which portfolio entrepreneurship develops in family firms. We address this gap by analyzing four in-depth, longitudinal family firm case studies from Europe and Latin America. Using a resource-based perspective, we identify six distinct resource categories that are relevant to the portfolio entrepreneurship process. Furthermore, we reveal that their importance varies across time. Our resulting resource-based process model of portfolio entrepreneurship in family firms makes valuable contributions to both theory and practice.

Individual decision-making by top executives as a valuable resource for strategic management – A resource-based view and dynamic capability approach

Strategy is highly important for organisational success and the achievement of competitive advantage. Strategy is dynamic and it depends on accurate individual decision-making from medium and high-level managers and executives. Since managers always formulate strategy, its formulation depends mostly on their assertive decisions. Making good decisions is a complex task, even more in today’s business world where a large quantity of information and a dynamic environment forces people to decide without having complete information. As Shafir, Simonson, & Tversky (1993) point out, "the making of decisions, both big and small, is often difficult because of uncertainty and conflict". In this paper the author will explain a basic theoretical framework about top manager's individual decision-making, showing how complex the process of making high-impact decisions is; then, he will compare this theory with one of the most important streams in strategic management, the Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm. Finally, within the context of individual decision-making and the RBV stream, the author will show how individual decision makers in top management positions constitute a valuable, rare, non-imitable and non-substitutable resource that provides sustained competitive advantage.

Linking resource acquisition and development processes to resource-based advantage : bricolage and the resource-based view

We investigate the relationship between bricolage – an approach to a firm’s resource development – and the firm’s strategic resource position as depicted by the resource-based view (RBV). The RBV is concerned with the resource characteristics of firms that lead to sustainable competitive advantage. Alternatively, bricolage is a process of resource use and development characterised by using resources at hand, recombining resources and making do. Based on a sample of approximately 700 nascent and 700 young firms we find that higher levels of bricolage behaviour tend to lead to more advantageous strategic resource positions.

Linking resource acquisition and development processes to resource-based advantage : bricolage and the resource-based view

We investigate the relationship between bricolage – an approach to a firm’s resource development – and the firm’s strategic resource position as depicted by the resource-based view (RBV). The RBV is concerned with the resource characteristics of firms that lead to sustainable competitive advantage. Alternatively, bricolage is a process of resource use and development characterised by using resources at hand, recombining resources and making do. Based on a sample of 1,329 entrepreneurial start-ups we find that higher levels of bricolage behaviour tend to lead to more advantageous strategic resource positions.

Betting on the underdog : bricolage as an engine of resource advantage

Resource-based theory posits that firms achieve high performance by controlling resources that are rare, valuable and costly for others to duplicate or work around. Yet scholars have been less successful understanding processes and behaviours by which firms develop such resources. We draw on the behavioral theory of bricolage from the entrepreneurship literature to suggest one such mechanism by which firms may develop such resource-based advantages. The core of our argument is that idiosyncratic bundling processes synonymous with bricolage behavior may create advantageous resource positions by (i) allowing resource constrained firms to allocate more of their limited resources to activities that they view as more strategically important, and (ii) increasing the difficulties other firms face in trying to imitate these advantages. Based on this reasoning we develop several hypotheses which we test in the context of several samples from a large, longitudinal, Australian study of new firm development. The results support our arguments that bricolage will improve a firms’ overall resource positions while generating more areas of strong resource advantage and fewer areas of strong resource disadvantage. We find little support, however, for our arguments that bricolage will make a firms’ key resource advantages more difficult for other firms to imitate. We find some support for our argument that the role of bricolage in creating resource advantages will be enhanced by the quality of the opportunity with which a firm is engaged.

Integrating the resource-based view and transaction cost economics in immigrant business performance

This paper presents a new integrated framework that integrates the resource-based view and transaction cost economics to explain the phenomenon of immigrant entrepreneurship. We extend the existing literature on immigrant entrepreneurship by identifying different types of ethnic network resources and demonstrating how these resources interact with transaction costs in the context of Chinese immigrants. Thus, our study contributes to the literature by providing a theoretical framework which identifies mechanisms immigrant entrepreneurs use to strategically deploy resources to minimize costs and maximize performance outcomes.

Perceptions of land-use uncertainty in Queensland's resource-based regions

Some of Queensland's regions are experiencing rapid changes related to the recent and growing capacity to more effectively exploit significant energy sources. These changes have triggered land-use conflicts between the mining sector and other economic sectors, mainly agriculture. These conflicts fuel existing uncertainty surrounding the current and future economic, social and environmental impacts of extractive industries. This paper explores the concept of uncertainty as it applies to planning for resource-based regions through a scoping analysis of regional stakeholders' perceptions of land-use uncertainty. It then investigates solutions to alleviate such an issue.

The essential parameters of a resource-based carrying capacity assessment model : an Australian case study

Carrying capacity assessments model a population’s potential self-sufficiency. A crucial first step in the development of such modelling is to examine the basic resource-based parameters defining the population’s production and consumption habits. These parameters include basic human needs such as food, water, shelter and energy together with climatic, environmental and behavioural characteristics. Each of these parameters imparts land-usage requirements in different ways and varied degrees so their incorporation into carrying capacity modelling also differs. Given that the availability and values of production parameters may differ between locations, no two carrying capacity models are likely to be exactly alike. However, the essential parameters themselves can remain consistent so one example, the Carrying Capacity Dashboard, is offered as a case study to highlight one way in which these parameters are utilised. While examples exist of findings made from carrying capacity assessment modelling, to date, guidelines for replication of such studies in other regions and scales have largely been overlooked. This paper addresses such shortcomings by describing a process for the inclusion and calibration of the most important resource-based parameters in a way that could be repeated elsewhere.